Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 11th Mar 2008 23:28 UTC, submitted by irbis
Mono Project "Does GNOME co-founder Miguel de Icaza's backflip over the Novell-Microsoft deal a few days ago mean that he has finally been convinced that he is on a one-way path to nowhere? Has he realised that his own project, Mono, is actually putting GNOME on a development track that can leave it open to patent claims one day? And has he realised that creating Moonlight, a clone of Microsoft's Silverlight, (with which the company hopes to trump Adobe's Flash) is not going to advance the cause of free software one iota?"
Thread beginning with comment 304606
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Destructive
by monodeldiablo on Wed 12th Mar 2008 04:33 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Destructive"
monodeldiablo
Member since:
2005-07-06

I'm afraid you have it backwards. The Mono project was announced almost exactly a year after development on Parrot (Perl 6) began. It then took three years for Mono to be released in usable form.

Vala's just a great idea that better addresses the Mono project's original goals than writing a virtual machine from scratch.

Wikipedia is your friend.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: Destructive
by lsls on Wed 12th Mar 2008 11:54 in reply to "RE[5]: Destructive"
lsls Member since:
2006-11-13

If you claim that Mono is not safe to use due to patents, then please don't claim that Vala and Parrot are safe. Vala is a C# clone, and Parrot is a VM.

Patents are about ideas, not about specific implementations. You should know that. So if there is any patented idea about C# or the CLR VM, they may as well apply to Vala and Parrot.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[7]: Destructive
by monodeldiablo on Wed 12th Mar 2008 19:22 in reply to "RE[6]: Destructive"
monodeldiablo Member since:
2005-07-06

Neither C#, nor VMs are encumbered by patents. The concern with Mono is that the usable, interesting bits are patent-encumbered (ASP.NET, WinForms, etc).

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Destructive
by Soulbender on Thu 13th Mar 2008 06:13 in reply to "RE[6]: Destructive"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Patents are about ideas, not about specific implementations.


It's the exact opposite, actually.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Destructive
by jpobst on Wed 12th Mar 2008 14:29 in reply to "RE[5]: Destructive"
jpobst Member since:
2006-09-26

I was going more for first release, project announcements aren't worth much without code, not that Wikipedia has much history or dates on either project. The best I could find was from Parrot's page, their first release:

Simon 0.0.1 2001-Sep-10

The best I could find for Mono was their 0.3 release announcement:
http://www.go-mono.com/archive/mono-0.3
dated July 12, 2001

So it definitely wasn't a year, I apologize. My point was that neither Parrot nor Vala were established, released projects that Mono people chose to ignore so they could rewrite everything from scratch.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: Destructive
by monodeldiablo on Wed 12th Mar 2008 19:26 in reply to "RE[6]: Destructive"
monodeldiablo Member since:
2005-07-06

And my point was that it didn't matter if they were established projects, since Parrot closely matched the Mono group's aims and was in existence at the time.

If you want to build a skyscraper, would you prefer to start with an existing, well-engineered foundation, or would you run off to dig your own hole and start from scratch yourself? If this was the closed-source world, I'd understand Mono's actions, but in the FOSS universe, it doesn't make much sense.

Reply Parent Score: 2